logo
‘Unfairly' criticized brunch staple actually isn't bad for your heart health: study

‘Unfairly' criticized brunch staple actually isn't bad for your heart health: study

New York Post3 days ago
Here's something to get egg-cited about.
A new study scrambles the long-held belief that eggs are bad for your heart, finding that eating a certain number daily might actually improve your cholesterol levels.
But it's not all sunny side up. While one breakfast staple has been eggsonerated, researchers warn that another could spell serious trouble for your ticker.
3 Eggs might not be the real villain lurking on your breakfast plate.
Pixel Stories/Stocksy – stock.adobe.com
Eggs are a nutritional powerhouse, packed with vitamins, minerals, antioxidants, protein and healthy fats. But they've long been in the hot seat because they're naturally high in dietary cholesterol.
For years, health officials and medical groups have recommended limiting egg consumption, concerned it could raise blood cholesterol levels and increase the risk of cardiovascular disease — the leading cause of death in the US.
But growing evidence suggests that risk might not be as significant as once believed.
'Eggs have long been unfairly cracked by outdated dietary advice,' Dr. Jon Buckley, a professor at the University of South Australia and lead researcher on the study, said in a statement.
'They're unique — high in cholesterol, yes, but low in saturated fat. Yet it's their cholesterol level that has often caused people to question their place in a healthy diet,' he continued.
3 Roughly 805,000 people in the US experience a heart attack each year, or about 1 in every 400 adults.
Kannapat – stock.adobe.com
To put it to the test, Buckley and his colleagues examined the independent effects of dietary cholesterol and saturated fat on LDL cholesterol — the so-called 'bad' cholesterol that can build up in the arteries and raise your risk of heart disease and stroke.
They found that eating two eggs a day, as part of a high-cholesterol but low–saturated fat diet, can actually reduce LDL levels and lower heart disease risk.
Instead, real culprit behind elevated blood cholesterol was saturated fat. This primarily comes from animal sources, such as meat and dairy products, along with tropical oils like coconut and palm.
'You could say we've delivered hard-boiled evidence in defense of the humble egg,' Buckley said.
'So, when it comes to a cooked breakfast, it's not the eggs you need to worry about — it's the extra serve of bacon or the side of sausage that's more likely to impact your heart health.'
3 Processed meats like bacon, sausage, hot dogs and ham often contain significant amounts of saturated fats.
Nelea Reazanteva – stock.adobe.com
Across the country, nearly 94 million American adults over the age of 20 have high cholesterol, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
However, because high cholesterol typically comes without noticeable symptoms, many people don't know they have it until serious complications arise — such as a heart attack or stroke.
To keep cholesterol levels in check, the American Heart Association (AHA) recommends making key lifestyle changes, including limiting saturated fat to less than 6% of your total daily calories.
For someone who eats about 2,000 calories a day, that means no more than 120 calories — or roughly 13 grams — should come from saturated fat.
That limit is easy to exceed. Just one tablespoon of butter has about 7 grams of saturated fat, while two slices of bacon pack in roughly 4 grams.
The AHA also advises cutting back on trans fats and increasing your intake of soluble fiber, omega-3 fatty acids, and pectin-rich foods like fruits and vegetables.
Beyond diet, the organization encourages regular physical activity, maintaining a healthy weight, and quitting smoking to help manage cholesterol levels and lower the risk of heart disease.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Young NYC volunteers net thousands of eels to aid science
Young NYC volunteers net thousands of eels to aid science

New York Post

timean hour ago

  • New York Post

Young NYC volunteers net thousands of eels to aid science

Eighth-graders on Staten Island spent their free time this past spring counting — thousands of eels! Dozens of nature-minded middle-schoolers waded into Richmond Creek with nets in hand to scoop out and count hordes of teeny, nearly invisible 'glass eels' making their yearly pilgrimage from the ocean into estuaries along the Hudson River. The kids registered roughly 11,000 of the American eels — most still in their juvenile stage and referred to as 'glass eels' at this point because they are almost see-through — as part of the state's annual eel count. Some of the budding naturalists named their slippery catches after their idols such as LeBron James and Michael Jordan before releasing them back into the water. 6 About 11,000 nearly invisible 'glass eels' were counted in Richmond Creek this past spring. Department of Environmental Conservation 'It was a lot of fun to be able to do it,' said one of the young counters, Mark Geissler, 13. 'I was pretty excited to be able to learn more about the eels and to be able to count them and be able to make sure our environment was healthy and the eels were healthy while they were traveling here,' he said. The teen estimated that he and his friends tallied and released as many as 400 eels in three trips to the creek in April — some of which they named after James and Jordan and other heroes. The young environmentalists used special nets that helped them see the tiny and otherwise nearly invisible fish as they traveled through the Staten Island waterway — which is one of the dozen Hudson River estuaries the state Department of Environmental Conservation monitors as part of its eel count. 6 The juvenile eels make a voyage each spring from the ocean to the Hudson River. Courtesy Mary Lee The count's 'robust' eel number is a good sign that the population is holding steady, according to scientists and preliminary data shared with The Post. The effort, now in its 18th year, registered a total of roughly 140,000 glass eels, which is on par with the average number collected since the program's inception. 6 Dozens of students from the St. Clare School volunteer for the count each year. Courtesy Mary Lee 'We're trying to get a census of baby American eels as they travel from the ocean to the estuary to the watershed,' said project leader Chris Bowser. 'We're trying to get a rough idea on the timing of eel migration and the strength of the migration. How many eels are there year after year?' 'Eels have had a rough century,' Bowser said — with their populations having suffered from overfishing and the introduction of dams, which have blocked their migration. American eels aren't endangered, but they are considered 'depleted' by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission. 6 Roughly 140,000 were counted across all 12 sites this spring. Mary Lee/St Clare School 6 The students gave some of the eels names before releasing them back in the water. Chris Bowser/NYSDEC The local count relies on the power and availability of volunteers — which is a core part of the eel count's educational mission. 'One of the beautiful things about eels is they're a very accessible animal. People can come to the river, they can come to their neighborhood stream, even a very urbanized river, and you are going to find these baby eels,' Bowser said. 'So it's an avenue into science, but it's also an avenue into getting to know your local waterway a little bit better.' And it's a hit with students. As with the eels, the young volunteers return year after year to help gauge the fish population. 6 'It's just so fun and exciting, and they all want to be a part of it,' teacher Mary Lee said of her students. St Clare School 'The kids love this count. They purchased their own waders so they can come as much as they want,' said Mary Lee, a science teacher at the St. Clare School and Environmental Leaders Fellowship team leader. Lee has been bringing her students to the eel count since the Richmond Creek monitoring location was established in 2012 — and says the program is so popular that students return to volunteer even after they've graduated. 'What's really fun is these kids have such a good understanding of nature by doing this,' Lee said. 'Like, they really, truly understand that the tides can bring the water levels higher, carry these little eels upstream,' she said, adding that counting the largest number of eels becomes a competition amongst the students. 'It's almost like status. It's a big deal. It's just so fun and exciting, and they all want to be a part of it.'

Is Biden's doctor covering up the president's last physical?
Is Biden's doctor covering up the president's last physical?

The Hill

timean hour ago

  • The Hill

Is Biden's doctor covering up the president's last physical?

Dr. Kevin O'Connor, former President Joe Biden's longtime personal doctor and reportedly sometime family business associate, refused to answer questions about Biden's health at a House Oversight and Government Reform Committee meeting on July 9. Asked to testify about Biden's physical and mental condition, the doctor invoked the Fifth Amendment and declined to answer based on doctor-patient confidentiality — or was it to not incriminate himself? O'Connor's lack of response only raises more doubts about Biden's health and his administration's cover-up of it. According to a statement from O'Connor's legal team, 'On the advice of his legal counsel, Dr. O'Connor refused to answer questions that invaded the well-established legal privilege that protects confidential matters between physicians and their patients.' While the expectation of privacy in the doctor-patient relationship is fundamental and sacrosanct, that expectation is greatly reduced when we're talking about the president, who lives in a glass White House. Many issues that are normally nobody's business become everybody's business when it comes to the president — and that includes medical issues. On Feb. 28, 2024, O'Connor released to the public the results of Biden's most recent (and last) presidential physical. Although it has apparently been taken down from the White House website, it is still available at the National Archives. It is a public document. If nothing else, O'Connor could have restricted his comments to what is revealed in the summary of the physical. The document highlights the medical conditions Biden was being treated for at the time: obstructive sleep apnea, non-valvular fibrillation, low lipid levels, reflux, his 'stiffened gait,' and several other conditions. No mental health assessment was made because O'Connor thought it wasn't necessary. Or maybe it just wasn't prudent. In the summary, O'Connor asserts the 2024 'Physical exam is essentially unchanged from baseline,' which presumably is referring to his first presidential exam in 2021. And he added at the release that Biden is a 'healthy, active, robust 81-year-old.' But that conclusion is questionable, given Biden's performance in the presidential debate just four months later. While it would be totally inappropriate for a doctor to publicly release the results of your or my physical exam, the American people have come to expect presidents to produce a summary of their annual physical. President Trump's physician, Dr. Sean P. Barbabella, released a summary of Trump's physical on April 13. And the White House just revealed Trump's chronic vein problem, even though it doesn't affect his job performance. People want to know if the person holding the most important job in the world is healthy and capable of doing the job. When a president goes under anesthesia for some medical procedure, reporters inform the public. If the president contracts COVID-19, as both Trump and Biden did, the news reports it. Note that Trump's physical included a PSA (prostate-specific antigen) test, which can indicate prostate cancer. The result was normal. Biden's released results did not include a PSA test, and we recently discovered he has an aggressive form of prostate cancer. Even former presidents may not have much of an expectation of privacy on medical issues. While Biden's medical conditions can no longer affect presidential duties, it's important to know whether there was a medical cover up so that, if there was, steps can be taken to prevent it in the future. So, what can Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.), who chairs the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, do about O'Connor's stonewalling? First, the simplest solution is for Comer to send Biden an official letter requesting him to allow O'Connor to discuss results of Biden's physicals. If Biden gives his consent — which I doubt he will — O'Connor can quit hiding behind doctor-patient confidentiality. If Biden refuses to give his consent, Comer should invite O'Connor back to discuss Biden's last two physical exams. They are public information, so O'Connor shouldn't have any problem discussing the results that have been made public. If O'Connor refuses, Comer has another option. When O'Connor initially released the results of the president's physical, he claimed that doctors in several specialties, without naming names, reviewed and signed off on O'Connor's report. Comer could ask for a list of the doctors who reviewed the data and ask them to testify as to whether they had reviewed and confirmed the physical's results. Although such hearings would no doubt be partisan, there is a broader policy issue at stake. The public needs to be able to trust information about a president's medical condition. Given what we've seen from the Biden administration, that's not the case.

National Science Foundation staffers express concerns about ‘politically motivated and legally questionable' Trump actions
National Science Foundation staffers express concerns about ‘politically motivated and legally questionable' Trump actions

The Hill

timean hour ago

  • The Hill

National Science Foundation staffers express concerns about ‘politically motivated and legally questionable' Trump actions

Employees of the National Science Foundation (NSF) are going public with what they described as 'politically motivated and legally questionable' actions by the Trump administration related to their agency. Their concerns range from mass firings by the administration's Department of Government Efficiency to interference with the grant process. In particular, the employees allege that for grants 'a covert and ideologically driven secondary review process by unqualified political appointees is now interfering with the scientific merit-based review system.' The accusation and others are detailed in a letter addressed to Rep. Zoe Lofgren (Calif.), the top Democrat on the House Science, Space and Technology Committee. Lofgren said at a press conference that the letter was being submitted to her office as 'a protected whistleblower disclosure.' It was signed by 149 staffers, virtually all of whom signed either anonymously or whose names were redacted in the version of the letter that was made public on Tuesday. The NSF is an independent science agency that supports scientific research across various fields including biology, engineering, computer science and geoscience. The agency declined to comment on the letter. The staffers also said that the administration canceled 1,600 NSF grants in April and May using 'undisclosed criteria' and that the White House Office of Management was withholding $2.2 billion of the agency's $9 billion budget that was appropriated by Congress. 'Members of the administration have a say on what programs get funded and what proposals get awarded,' said Jesus Soriano, president of the AFGE Local 3403, which represents NSF employees. Their full list of concerns was: 'A Proposed Budget Cut That Would Cripple American Science,' 'Termination of Active Research Awards Without Transparency or Lawful Justification,' 'Political Review of Scientific Grants,' 'Withholding of Appropriated Funds,' 'Unlawful Terminations and Threatened Mass Reductions in Force,' 'Coerced Resignations and Loss of Expertise,' 'Unannounced and Unplanned Eviction from Headquarters' and 'NSF's Betrayal of Scientific Integrity Through Politicized Probation Policies.' The letter comes after staff members at other agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Institutes of Health published letters of 'dissent' to raise concerns about Trump administration policies. The administration put the signers of the EPA letter on leave

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store